Mike Anderson Tweets

[Kamkaizen]

Hi, I'm Tom Crean.

So, you're saying Indiana's program was in identical shape or worse than ours when Tom took over?  Really?

[Dogtown Donkey]

So, you're saying Indiana's program was in identical shape or worse than ours when Tom took over?  Really?

It was in much worse shape, but you just said:

When was the last time you guys took over a tanking D1 basketball program and re-engineered it to again be a winner?

That definitely describes Indiana and Tom Crean, no?

I was just joking around.

[dsims2k3]

It was in much worse shape, but you just said:

That definitely describes Indiana and Tom Crean, no?

I was just joking around.

boom

[-Blu]

I disagree with this. Look at LSU. They're doing really well in recruiting right now and they brought in a guy that can push the needle recruiting. I think, generally speaking, you're right. But it is possible to recruit a high level before you get into the NCAA tournaments. It takes a guy with strong ties. That's what we're lacking right now. We shouldn't be getting out-recruited by LSU because their fanbase does not care nearly as much about their basketball program, they surely don't put as much money into their basketball program (though they do have a practice facility), and they don't have a proven head coach. And now they've just added a strong recruiter to their staff. And before LSU, there was Baylor. They were dead in the water but they had great recruiters and started getting top talent without postseason success.

We've been right there with a few big names that could have put us into the NCAA tournament and I think if a better recruiter is added, we'll be able to compete better.

So, I mean we had a top 10 class in 2011, top 20 class in 2013, and more than likely have a top 10-15 class in 2014.  Should we be having top 5 classes every year, and we've been bad for over a decade?  Your kinda contradicting yourself, because in an earlier post when you were defending Mizzou over Arkansas, I actually said Arkansas has the resources, tradition, and fan support to sustain being a great recruiting school once we got rebuilt. And you told me, that Mizzou had a better situation and they should be out recruiting Arkansas.

They have a bigger talent pool to pull from and they have better facilities right now. Our practice facility isn't even close to being built.

As far as recruiting goes, they're in a much better position than we are. We have the better coach and fanbase. That's where it ends. That's just me trying to objective.

And then you told me that kids don't care about program tradition, history, and the schools resources.  Which are our schools biggest selling points at present. So, I'm confused on what your point is?  You claim, we shouldn't be out recruiting Mizzoui, who before CMA, was irrelevant in the basketball world, but then claim we should be out recruiting schools that have been having success.

Having more historical success means what to recruits RIGHT NOW? Nothing. Why is Baylor out-recruiting us and other schools? Oklahoma State? LSU? The list goes on. That holds no water.

So, what I've gotten from you is.  We shouldn't be able to out recruit Mizzou (Who is not a recruiting power house) because they got better facilities, better recruiting ground, and a better program.  However, we should be able to out recruit everyone else, and the reason we are not is because our assistant coaches suck. 

C'mon Dogtown, your better than this man.  I know your a true hog fan, but I think your drinking just a lil bit of that haterade.  You contradicted yourself hardcore on the SAME THREAD lol.

[Dogtown Donkey]

So, I mean we had a top 10 class in 2011, top 20 class in 2013, and more than likely have a top 10-15 class in 2014.  Should we be having top 5 classes every year, and we've been bad for over a decade?  Your kinda contradicting yourself, because in an earlier post when you were defending Mizzou over Arkansas, I actually said Arkansas has the resources, tradition, and fan support to sustain being a great recruiting school once we got rebuilt. And you told me, that Mizzou had a better situation and they should be out recruiting Arkansas.

And then you told me that kids don't care about program tradition, history, and the schools resources.  Which are our schools biggest selling points at present. So, I'm confused on what your point is?  You claim, we shouldn't be out recruiting Mizzoui, who before CMA, was irrelevant in the basketball world, but then claim we should be out recruiting schools that have been having success.

So, what I've gotten from you is.  We shouldn't be able to out recruit Mizzou (Who is not a recruiting power house) because they got better facilities, better recruiting ground, and a better program.  However, we should be able to out recruit everyone else, and the reason we are not is because our assistant coaches suck. 

C'mon Dogtown, your better than this man.  I know your a true hog fan, but I think your drinking just a lil bit of that haterade.  You contradicted yourself hardcore on the SAME THREAD lol.

I said *generally* you were correct that it's hard to recruit if you aren't having success (whick was one of my original points). But you said that the coaching staff was maxed out and it wouldn't matter what we paid the assistants because we aren't having postseason success. I pointed out a situation very close to Arkansas that shows that we could maybe be doing more to improve out recruiting as far as out-of-state recruiting goes. I don't think I've contradicted myself. Maybe you're missing some key words in what I'm saying.

You keep beating the drum about how great our recent classes have been, but those classes are all centered around top out-of-state talent, correct? And what happened in 2012 when we missed on the one elite in-state guy we had? Unranked class, right? Solid class but not good enough nationally. We have to recruit better out-of-state because even though Arkansas has produced good talent lately, we can't live and die by that. Other schools directly competing with us, like LSU, are jumping out in front there despite no postseason success. I'm sorry, but our staff needs a shake up if you're telling me it's maxed out. I know you think I'm so giant hater but that's how I see it. I'd rather see a solution to the problem than make excuses.

[Dogtown Donkey]

Also, Blu, you claimed that I said we shouldn't be out recruiting Mizzou but I didn't say that. I said they had better recruiting grounds and better facilities than we did. They aren't really out recruiting us because their coach sucks.

[Smithian]

Let this thread die.

[-Blu]

Let this thread die.

Why?  It's literally nothing else going on.  We are keeping this fourm going in the offseason.

I know you think I'm so giant hater but that's how I see it. I'd rather see a solution to the problem than make excuses.

No, don't think your a giant hater, I actually like and agree with some of your other posts in others threads, I just think your hating just a lil bit on our coaching staff recruiting ability.  Our recruiting situation isn't nearly as bad as you make it seem. 

With that said, who do you feel on our staff is not doing well?  And who would you replace them with?

[rzrbackramsfan]

Also, Blu, you claimed that I said we shouldn't be out recruiting Mizzou but I didn't say that. I said they had better recruiting grounds and better facilities than we did. They aren't really out recruiting us because their coach sucks.

What is your definition of recruiting grounds?  I know I said it first, but I meant ability to recruit/recruiting resources.  Isn't the entire world recruiting grounds?  I mean Mario Chalmers is from Alaska and went to Kansas.

Arkansas can recruit better than Mizzou, and, lots of other schools, IF they're relevant.  There's just something more unique about 40 MOH that's wearing red the color of I'm going to run and dunk all over you, Clinton loved, a 90's power house, in front of 20,000 crazy-a@# fans, dawns the Razorback logo.  The Missouri Tigers on the other hand, I'm from Missouri, it's just not the same.   

Anderson is at the age where he wants to settle into his retirement job.  He wants to be that schools Jim Boehin (sp?), Mike Krycheveski (sp?), Calhoun, etc... For the reasons listed above, and for the nostalgia, he decided that Arkansas was the place he wanted to do it at.  Based on what he's done at his former stops, how the team plays (does anyone even remember how bad those Pelphhrey teams were?), and the momentum he has going, we're lucky to have him.  He's gonna win big, it's as predictable as a scary movie.         

[Dogtown Donkey]

No, don't think your a giant hater, I actually like and agree with some of your other posts in others threads, I just think your hating just a lil bit on our coaching staff recruiting ability.  Our recruiting situation isn't nearly as bad as you make it seem.

Our staff isn't that good at recruiting out-of-state players. We're living and dying by in-state talent. And that really shows when the in-state talent doesn't perform well once it gets to campus. We were fortunate enough to get Moses Kingsley this year, and that's a huge feather in MA and co.'s cap, but that isn't the norm.

I'll make this deal with you. If the staff can lock up Nick Babb, I'll lay off them about recruiting for the rest of the summer.

With that said, who do you feel on our staff is not doing well?  And who would you replace them with?

The guy I think is most replaceable is Matt Zimmerman. I'd replace him with a guy with strong AAU ties. Who exactly? I don't know. But they're out there. Find a nice, clean guy and hire him.

[Dogtown Donkey]

What is your definition of recruiting grounds?  I know I said it first, but I meant ability to recruit/recruiting resources.  Isn't the entire world recruiting grounds?  I mean Mario Chalmers is from Alaska and went to Kansas.

I would take "recruiting grounds" to mean your natural recruiting region.

Arkansas can recruit better than Mizzou, and, lots of other schools, IF they're relevant.  There's just something more unique about 40 MOH that's wearing red the color of I'm going to run and dunk all over you, Clinton loved, a 90's power house, in front of 20,000 crazy-a@# fans, dawns the Razorback logo.  The Missouri Tigers on the other hand, I'm from Missouri, it's just not the same.   

Sounds like you're stuck in the '90s. It's not quite the same now. Maybe Mike will get it back there, but it definitely isn't there right now and hasn't been since Nolan was fired.

Anderson is at the age where he wants to settle into his retirement job.  He wants to be that schools Jim Boehin (sp?), Mike Krycheveski (sp?), Calhoun, etc... For the reasons listed above, and for the nostalgia, he decided that Arkansas was the place he wanted to do it at.  Based on what he's done at his former stops, how the team plays (does anyone even remember how bad those Pelphhrey teams were?), and the momentum he has going, we're lucky to have him.  He's gonna win big, it's as predictable as a scary movie.       

Do I remember how bad those Pelphrey teams were? Yeah, I do. They really weren't that much worse than these first two Mike Anderson teams. In fact, Mike Anderson's first year was worse than Pelphrey's last year. I'd take Mike Anderson over John Pelphrey 10 times out of 10, but the difference, as far as wins and losses, really hasn't been night and day. We still can't win on the road. Both coaches share that. Still haven't cracked 20 wins since Pelphrey's 1st season. Mike did get 10 conference wins this year but we're also playing with an 18 game schedule (would have been 9-7 with a 16 game SEC schedule, 18-11 overall).

Are we getting better? Yes, of course. Is the improvement as stark as you're claiming it is? No. It's been a slow climb so far. Hopefully we make a big jump in one regard or another this year. No one seems to want to acknowledge it when they coming me in this thread, but I've said I think the loss of Young and Powell is actually a positive and that it would improve chemistry, combined with the addition of Portis and Kingsley. I got railed to high heaven for saying that during the season. Accused of being an MA apologist. Now I'm sitting here getting lectured on how Mike Anderson is going get everything right and I'm hating on him. Guys, I know what's going on. Some of you just aren't willing to criticize anything. And that's fine, just don't get your panties in a wad when someone else does it.

Oh, and I also said we were going to win 23 games before this past season. I know we're headed in the right direction and things can't happen overnight, but I still think some changes need to be made before we can truly be a national power again.

[Dogtown Donkey]

Let this thread die.

Is someone making you read it??

[Smithian]

Is someone making you read it??

Yes.

[azhog10]

Have you read the thread?

I posted tweets of his from around the time of Italy trip........you know, before we missed the NIT......again. That's disappointing, right? We should have made the NIT, right?

And why restrict this to tweeting? He's obviously made remarks like this to the media all the time. Like I said, it's coach speak.

"Getting after it" and praising hte atmosphere and bonding is completely different than a coach saying he is "pleased" with the effort they are giving. Again what he said isn't like what he said last year.

I'm sure we can argue on and on about it. But if a coach uses the word "pleased" normally means they are doing okay, but aren't really giving everything they are capable of.

[HF#1]

Mike has had three years to put something decent on the court and hasn't done it yet.  We'll see what happens this year but I do not care what he is tweeting or saying.  Put it on the court then I will be interested in what he tweets.

[kingofdequeen]

Mike has had three years to put something decent on the court and hasn't done it yet.  We'll see what happens this year but I do not care what he is tweeting or saying.  Put it on the court then I will be interested in what he tweets.

I'm slept since then, but where is that 3rd year?

[CapitalCityHawg]

Mike has had three years to put something decent on the court and hasn't done it yet.  We'll see what happens this year but I do not care what he is tweeting or saying.  Put it on the court then I will be interested in what he tweets.

This will be his third year. He has only been here 2.

[HF#1]

delete

[HF#1]

This will be his third year. He has only been here 2.

Double post

[HF#1]

This will be his third year. He has only been here 2.

I have done that multiple times now.  For some reason I get it in my head he has been here 3 years.  I'm losing it or I'm turning into Guv...

He's had two years and hasn't done anything so I'll wait and see.  I still don't care what he tweets or says.  I'm going to go off myself now.

[99toLife]

I have done that multiple times now.  For some reason I get it in my head he has been here 3 years.  I'm losing it or I'm turning into Guv...

He's had two years and hasn't done anything so I'll wait and see.  I still don't care what he tweets or says.  I'm going to go off myself now.

No you're not.

[HF#1]

The fact that this is at the top of the forum only makes it worse.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[CapitalCityHawg]

I have done that multiple times now.  For some reason I get it in my head he has been here 3 years.  I'm losing it or I'm turning into Guv...

He's had two years and hasn't done anything so I'll wait and see.  I still don't care what he tweets or says.  I'm going to go off myself now.

No worries. The point you were making is valid. He and the team have to show progress on the floor.

[kingofdequeen]

No worries. The point you were making is valid. you should go off yourself.

Fixt.

[HF#1]

Fixt.

Haha!

[CapitalCityHawg]

Fixt.

Haha. I legitimately laughed at that one.

[rzrbackramsfan]

I would take "recruiting grounds" to mean your natural recruiting region.

Sounds like you're stuck in the '90s. It's not quite the same now. Maybe Mike will get it back there, but it definitely isn't there right now and hasn't been since Nolan was fired.

Do I remember how bad those Pelphrey teams were? Yeah, I do. They really weren't that much worse than these first two Mike Anderson teams. In fact, Mike Anderson's first year was worse than Pelphrey's last year. I'd take Mike Anderson over John Pelphrey 10 times out of 10, but the difference, as far as wins and losses, really hasn't been night and day. We still can't win on the road. Both coaches share that. Still haven't cracked 20 wins since Pelphrey's 1st season. Mike did get 10 conference wins this year but we're also playing with an 18 game schedule (would have been 9-7 with a 16 game SEC schedule, 18-11 overall).

Are we getting better? Yes, of course. Is the improvement as stark as you're claiming it is? No. It's been a slow climb so far. Hopefully we make a big jump in one regard or another this year. No one seems to want to acknowledge it when they coming me in this thread, but I've said I think the loss of Young and Powell is actually a positive and that it would improve chemistry, combined with the addition of Portis and Kingsley. I got railed to high heaven for saying that during the season. Accused of being an MA apologist. Now I'm sitting here getting lectured on how Mike Anderson is going get everything right and I'm hating on him. Guys, I know what's going on. Some of you just aren't willing to criticize anything. And that's fine, just don't get your panties in a wad when someone else does it.

Oh, and I also said we were going to win 23 games before this past season. I know we're headed in the right direction and things can't happen overnight, but I still think some changes need to be made before we can truly be a national power again.

Well I think I agree with you on most everything except for the fact that Anderson will get a program rolling, and he believes (because it is true) that Arkansas is a better place to do that at.  For the reasons why I'm stuck in the 90's for, but have actually been true on a small scale since he has been here.  His style of play just looks good in Bud Walton Arena as the Arkansas Razorbacks. 

Pel's teams may have been close record wise, but I don't know how.  Those teams played with no heart, very disorganized, and missed layups.  Anderson's teams play with heart, is an organized chaos, and don't miss nearly as many layups.  I don't have stats, but I'm happy with Anderson and not with Pel, even though they have similar records, that has to say something.  Anybody feel the same?

[dsims2k3]

Well I think I agree with you on most everything except for the fact that Anderson will get a program rolling, and he believes (because it is true) that Arkansas is a better place to do that at.  For the reasons why I'm stuck in the 90's for, but have actually been true on a small scale since he has been here.  His style of play just looks good in Bud Walton Arena as the Arkansas Razorbacks. 

Pel's teams may have been close record wise, but I don't know how.  Those teams played with no heart, very disorganized, and missed layups.  Anderson's teams play with heart, is an organized chaos, and don't miss nearly as many layups.  I don't have stats, but I'm happy with Anderson and not with Pel, even though they have similar records, that has to say something.  Anybody feel the same?

I feel great because this is a rebuild. It isn't a quick fix. The biggest thing to fix on this team was its mindset. That has been gradually changing with addition of last year's class. There has been a few disappointments along the way but nothing abnormal. If no one can understand that then it is by choice.

[azhog10]

I have done that multiple times now.  For some reason I get it in my head he has been here 3 years.  I'm losing it or I'm turning into Guv...

He's had two years and hasn't done anything so I'll wait and see.  I still don't care what he tweets or says.  I'm going to go off myself now.

You are right, in year 2 he was able to go undefeated at home in the SEC and lose only one game all year at home. I would definitely consider that nothing.

[azhog10]

No worries. The point you were making is valid. He and the team have to show progress on the floor.

And they didn't between year 1 and 2? Our SEC record year 1 and year 2 say otherwise.....

[azhog10]

 
I feel great because this is a rebuild. It isn't a quick fix. The biggest thing to fix on this team was its mindset. That has been gradually changing with addition of last year's class. There has been a few disappointments along the way but nothing abnormal. If no one can understand that then it is by choice.

Truer words have never been spoken on this forum.

[Dogtown Donkey]

And they didn't between year 1 and 2? Our SEC record year 1 and year 2 say otherwise.....

Record-wise, yes, but we'd be remiss if we left out all the facts. Like the fact that the SEC was worse than it was in Anderson's first season (4 NCAA bids in 2012 and 3 in 2013 - counting Missouri, who was in the Big 12 the year before). That definitely played into the record improvement. I'm not sure how anyone could argue otherwise. A win's a win but context helps.

The end result was the same as it has been for the previous 4 seasons. It's really hard to argue that too much progress/improvement was made under that scenario.

[rzrbackramsfan]

Record-wise, yes, but we'd be remiss if we left out all the facts. Like the fact that the SEC was worse than it was in Anderson's first season (4 NCAA bids in 2012 and 3 in 2013 - counting Missouri, who was in the Big 12 the year before). That definitely played into the record improvement. I'm not sure how anyone could argue otherwise. A win's a win but context helps.

The end result was the same as it has been for the previous 4 seasons. It's really hard to argue that too much progress/improvement was made under that scenario.

And our ooc was probably harder

[Dogtown Donkey]

And our ooc was probably harder

And we only won 1 good game in those harder non-con games. You don't get credit for losing tough games.

[rzrbackramsfan]

And we only won 1 good game in those harder non-con games. You don't get credit for losing tough games.

Well if you discount their record hardly improving you have to take into account a rougher schedule.  Mainly because ooc.

[HawgAdvocate]

Well if you discount their record hardly improving you have to take into account a rougher schedule.  Mainly because ooc.

That still doesn't do the team any favors. Winning two road games in two years is the biggest stat that has to change before we can say this program has improved, regardless if we're losing big at 200+ RPI South Carolina or by 13 at top five ranked Michigan.

[Dogtown Donkey]

Well if you discount their record hardly improving you have to take into account a rougher schedule.  Mainly because ooc.

I'm having trouble figuring out how all this equates to the true improvement of the record. Tougher OOC schedule that didn't translate to better/more wins, easier SEC schedule + two additional SEC games did lead to more wins. Sounds like we won more games once they got easier.....and not more road games.

I'm not trying to be hater or down on things, but that's just how I see it. That's just the reality of the situation as I see it. I'm not a first glance guy. It'd be easy to see improvement if you just looked at things on the surface.

[rzrbackramsfan]

I don't think the sec really was that much easier, just less top heavy.  Sec games are also harder than cream puff ooc games.  What it comes down to, is I see one more win with a tougher schedule and I guess you don't think it was tougher.

You both are absolutely right about the road games.

[Dogtown Donkey]

I don't think the sec really was that much easier, just less top heavy.  Sec games are also harder than cream puff ooc games.  What it comes down to, is I see one more win with a tougher schedule and I guess you don't think it was tougher.

You both are absolutely right about the road games.

The SEC was as bad as it's perhaps ever been. I believe the overall RPI of the conference was the lowest it's ever been.

[CallThemHawgs!]

Why is this a sticky?

[azhog10]

I'm having trouble figuring out how all this equates to the true improvement of the record. Tougher OOC schedule that didn't translate to better/more wins, easier SEC schedule + two additional SEC games did lead to more wins. Sounds like we won more games once they got easier.....and not more road games.

I'm not trying to be hater or down on things, but that's just how I see it. That's just the reality of the situation as I see it. I'm not a first glance guy. It'd be easy to see improvement if you just looked at things on the surface.

So you didn't see any improvement from year 1 to year 2? If your answer is no then I won't waste time trying to spell it out for you. I think there's a consensus that some believe they saw improvement, not just record wise i.e. going undefeated at home in conference, but also improvement as a team. If you think neither of those happened, then I guess that's your position. But stating the SEC being down this year vs. last year in and of itself as the only reason why this team was able to go undefeated at home in the SEC seems pretty silly. We beat two of those three NCAAT teams at home and our performance on the road was bad like it was last year, we still played a very tough schecudule and went to Michigan and played a very respectful game IMO. We played with a lot of young guys, and played with two guys who were just in it for themselves with one foot already out the door. If you want to take into consideration how weak the SEC was, I think you also have to look at the makeup of the team and who did and did not perform like did a year ago.

So yes there was improvement. Was it as much as Mike's paycheck says it should be......well that's for you to decide.

[HawgAdvocate]

We played with a lot of young guys, and played with two guys who were just in it for themselves with one foot already out the door. If you want to take into consideration how weak the SEC was, I think you also have to look at the makeup of the team and who did and did not perform like did a year ago.

This statement can be apply to both seasons.

We got better in some areas, and we got worse in others.

We didn't improve enough in order to make the postseason and we still just won just one road game for the 2nd straight year.

Talk of improvement doesn't go very far right now.

[rzrbackramsfan]

Ok well we should have been in the nit honestly.  At least a lot of the games we lost close, we were playing well.  It took the opposing team their best game.  With pel when we lost close it was because the other team played down to their competition (it was a sloppy game all around).  Kind of like when you're playing somebody really bad in a sport, it beings your gam down. 

[HawgAdvocate]

Ok well we should have been in the nit honestly.  At least a lot of the games we lost close, we were playing well.  It took the opposing team their best game.  With pel when we lost close it was because the other team played down to their competition (it was a sloppy game all around).  Kind of like when you're playing somebody really bad in a sport, it beings your gam down. 

What are you talking about? Look at the last few losses of the season. They include:

Losing at Mizzou by 30
Losing at Florida by 17
Losing at Vandy by 18
Losing at South Carolina by 21
Losing at Ole Miss by 12
Losing at A&M by 18

The closer losses at Bama, LSU, and then to Vandy in the SEC-T don't come close to overshadowing the others.

[rzrbackramsfan]

They just ran out of time with ole miss, and Florida had to play a heck of a game to beat us.  Their were some eggs laid on the road, but for the most part, when we lost, the other team was having one of their best games of their year. Getting close in those games is called knocking on the door of bball success. 

[HawgAdvocate]

They just ran out of time with ole miss, and Florida had to play a heck of a game to beat us.  Their were some eggs laid on the road, but for the most part, when we lost, the other team was having one of their best games of their year. Getting close in those games is called knocking on the door of bball success. 

Getting close? We were down by 20 points with 10 minutes left to go in the 2nd half to Florida. It never got closer than 16 the rest of the game. There were certainly more double digit losses than then there were single digit losses, especially in SEC play.

Other teams tend to have "their best games" when we don't play nearly well enough to stop/slow them down. There's not enough sugar in Cuba to change that.

[hamARchy in the USA]

Schedule hasn't come out yet, but I see at LEAST 23-24 wins next year. Hoping for 25-26 with SEC Tourney.

Perhaps you'll be on the mark but in 11 seasons as a head coach MA has only had 4 teams win as many as 23 games, only 2 teams win as many as 24 games, and only 1 team win more than 24 games.  More importantly, he's only had one team play well enough over the course of a season to at least tie for a conference championship.

Don't you know that history doesn't apply to MA !

                    2013-14
Arkansas     10-8      22-12

Stats are only as useful as the person interpreting them. That's why there are sayings such as "stats are for losers" and "there are lies, dam lies, and statistics."

But go ahead with whatever fits your agenda.

Ignorant.....

And yes, when you leave out critical aspects of a story to support your position, that is having an agenda.

Are you this out of the loop or just that stupid?

[RyeHogFan]

Umm....congrats?